Meanwhile Microsoft continues to lag way behind. Not a single game for the console ranked in the top 100 sales chart for the first half of 2005 - just like 2004. Fable sold the most with 12,090 copies, but this was no where near the 100th place in the chart (Rockman Zero 4 for the GBA, which sold 65,341 copies). Embarrasingly, the best-selling game for the PSOne (a reissue of Valkyrie Profile) still sold double the volume of Fable.
Happily, Nintendo were the top publisher, shipping a total of 3,166,103 games. The company also had the biggest number of games - 17 - in the top 100. Sony Computer Entertainment was in second with around a million less games, followed by Namco in third, while Square Enix and Bandai rounded out the top five publishers
The Revolution's showing at E3 was no less poor than any of the other consoles.
Seriously. All we have for the 360 and PS3 are bull shit numbers that mean nothing, there are NO real world numbers just hyped up BULL SHIT.
Second the games shown on the systems were fucking pre-rendered crap that wasn't even running on the console. Whoopty fucking doo.
Third people say the Revo was just an empty box. What, you mean the PS3 was a complete and final product? Fuck no not even close and the same thing goes for the 360. Give me a fucking break.
Oh, so we didn't get to see the controller. Who cares, the PS3 controller is exactly the same as the PS2 controller except now it's a fucking boomerang and the 360 controller hardly looks any different than the XBox controller.
This doesn't really apply to most people here I guess, but if you read comments at sites like joystiq.com or engadget.com or even the bull shit at IGN you'll see how very extreamly pathetic some of those people are.
How many Linux geeks are there in the world who don't already own a wireless router?
How many of the Linux Geeks who DONT already own a wireless router are not going to be excited over the fact that they have an excuse to go buy a new toy (in the form of a wireless router)?
So with that said... Tell me again why this is an issue?
I've purchased no less than 3 PS2's my self and I'm not even a huge fan of it, and to top it off I'm about to buy another one for my bro (for the third time) because once again the thing has quit working (making it a total of 4 ps2's I've purchased). I've also owned 2 xbox's one which broke and the other which was stolen along with my PS2 (I never bothered to re-purchase these for my self because I dont play them anyway and my roommates already have them).
I've only ever owned 1 gamecube. I got it when it came out and I have NEVER had a problem with it.
Now lets take a look at my roommates heh..
2 of them have gotten no less than 2 PS2's each because they keep breaking and my friends XBox just broke so he's getting another one of those.
Almost everybody I know who has a PS2 has purchased at least 2-3 of them.
Why? Real Routers already exist. They aren't trival to setup for a novice either.
The whole point here is to make it brain dead simple to add wireless to your existing internet connection.
If you want a more advanced soultion BUY A WIRELESS ROUTER.
Seriously people. If you're gonna act like you're too eliete for something like this then you should be eliete enough to know that it's not even an issue worth worying about you because it effects yuu in no way at all!
Blizzard makes PC games fucking DUH. There is a HUGE difference here.
If Blizzard didn't make PC games and only PS2/XBox they probably wouldn't have 1/1000th of the online customers that they have now. Either that or there would be a HUGE jump in the online console market, and by huge I mean in the millions. XBox live only has about a million subscribers as it is if even that.
Shit there are probably more battle.net users than there are XBox owners and GC owners combined.
Saying that it'll do 1 tflop and run 20+x faster than the XBox isn't over hyping? Sorry but I call that hype.
What about all the public aruging MS and Sony have been doing for the past month or two?
I mean shit, it's quite possible the thing could run at that speed and yet still not run games any faster than the XBox because of bottle necks alone. (altho I doubt that would happen, but it's still possible.. numbers alone don't mean shit we need real world performance)
I place my money on the 360 being 2-5x faster than the xbox tops.
None of those games run adequately on a 386. 486 maybe, 386 no. My *entire* purpose for upgrading to a 486 was because Doom ran so choppy on my 386. Perhaps it would have done better with a higher clocked 386 with more ram or what not, but I dunno. There is no way Duke 3D runs adequately on a 386.
Sure 320x200 looks like crap to you NOW but 10+ years ago I bet you were perfectly fine with it.
You mean *gasp* the kind of games people who buy the PSP expect to play because that's the entire reason they got the PSP over a GBA/DS in the first place?
It's game sales that should count. Sony can sell all the PSP's they want but until they start selling games they are the ones on the loseing.
In Japan the DS has been the best selling console for several weeks strait and has been easily beating the psp by thousands of units sold every week. The DS has surpassed the PSP in sales for this year and still has over 1 million unit lead over the PSP in Japan alone.
Also the DS has had 2-4 games in the top 10 best selling games in Japan for several months where the PSP has only had 1 single game enter the top 10 and that only lasted a week.
If people aren't buying games for the PSP then it's hardly stealing market share from Nintendo. It's probably stealing more market from portable DVD players than the DS.
Hmmm I don't think he was saying Nintendogs wasn't a great game just that it's a game which could appeal to a lot of non-gamers or new gamers.
There are a ton of reasons why MS wants to make games for the DS and there's nothing to say they won't make games for the PSP in the future. Perhaps they are scared of the fact that games haven't been selling so well on the PSP compared to the DS?
Wasn't the industry already dying around the time Atari died anyway? I mean, it's not like they died because Nintendo came along and took all their market right? If that is what happened, then Atari dying might not have caused the industry to nearly collapse.
On the second point. I see what you're saying, but maybe Microsoft vs Sony would be a better example.
Nintendo doesn't seem to be competing for the same type of gamers that Sony and MS are competing for.
For instance most of the popular games on Nintendo consoles are made by Nintendo, but say if Microsoft killed off Sony don't you think Rockstar and Squar Enix would start making their popular games for the Xbox?
Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony derive no benefit from the disappearance of any competitor aside from any side-effects ghat MIGHT result in them selling more games and so making more money.
I don't understand what you're saying?
First. Making money IS the benefit. It's their whole purpose for existing in the first place.
Second. Why wouldn't having no competition result in selling more games?
Seriously. Blow people up, I don't care. Just don't do it outside my FECKING window. I work nights and sleep days. You know how fecking hard it is to sleep with explosions and flying body parts going on right out side my window? Show some curtesy to those of us not being blown up please. Thanks.
Uhh yeah. That's why I pay more that DOUBLE the price for a gallon of gas now than I did just a few years ago. It's all that extra oil we have now from invading iraq. It sure as hell paid off. Talk of the price going up by more than a dollar by the end of the year is further proof of our success in iraq. All this extra oil is REALLY paying off. Soon I'll be paying $4/gallon. Hooray for oil!! Now we just need to invade another country for their oil so I can start paying $8/gallon. Fuck yeah!!! Whose with me?
Slashdot Mirror
forgot to post the gamespot link which was the source for the story.
8 89.html
http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/07/12/news_6128
The Revolution's showing at E3 was no less poor than any of the other consoles.
Seriously. All we have for the 360 and PS3 are bull shit numbers that mean nothing, there are NO real world numbers just hyped up BULL SHIT.
Second the games shown on the systems were fucking pre-rendered crap that wasn't even running on the console. Whoopty fucking doo.
Third people say the Revo was just an empty box. What, you mean the PS3 was a complete and final product? Fuck no not even close and the same thing goes for the 360. Give me a fucking break.
Oh, so we didn't get to see the controller. Who cares, the PS3 controller is exactly the same as the PS2 controller except now it's a fucking boomerang and the 360 controller hardly looks any different than the XBox controller.
This doesn't really apply to most people here I guess, but if you read comments at sites like joystiq.com or engadget.com or even the bull shit at IGN you'll see how very extreamly pathetic some of those people are.
A real geek would already have sshd running on their cell phone
No, you and ever PS2 owner on the planet is a fan of single player games in my opinion.
The lack of 4 controller ports on the PS2 has to be the stupidest thing EVER
How many Linux geeks are there in the world who don't already own a wireless router?
How many of the Linux Geeks who DONT already own a wireless router are not going to be excited over the fact that they have an excuse to go buy a new toy (in the form of a wireless router)?
So with that said... Tell me again why this is an issue?
hahaha
I agree about the sales numbers 100%.
I've purchased no less than 3 PS2's my self and I'm not even a huge fan of it, and to top it off I'm about to buy another one for my bro (for the third time) because once again the thing has quit working (making it a total of 4 ps2's I've purchased). I've also owned 2 xbox's one which broke and the other which was stolen along with my PS2 (I never bothered to re-purchase these for my self because I dont play them anyway and my roommates already have them).
I've only ever owned 1 gamecube. I got it when it came out and I have NEVER had a problem with it.
Now lets take a look at my roommates heh..
2 of them have gotten no less than 2 PS2's each because they keep breaking and my friends XBox just broke so he's getting another one of those.
Almost everybody I know who has a PS2 has purchased at least 2-3 of them.
Why? Real Routers already exist. They aren't trival to setup for a novice either.
The whole point here is to make it brain dead simple to add wireless to your existing internet connection.
If you want a more advanced soultion BUY A WIRELESS ROUTER.
Seriously people. If you're gonna act like you're too eliete for something like this then you should be eliete enough to know that it's not even an issue worth worying about you because it effects yuu in no way at all!
Blizzard makes PC games fucking DUH. There is a HUGE difference here.
If Blizzard didn't make PC games and only PS2/XBox they probably wouldn't have 1/1000th of the online customers that they have now. Either that or there would be a HUGE jump in the online console market, and by huge I mean in the millions. XBox live only has about a million subscribers as it is if even that.
Shit there are probably more battle.net users than there are XBox owners and GC owners combined.
Only about 2-5% of Xbox owners use XBox live and I doubt even 1% of PS2 owners use their PS2 online.
Nintendo was 100% right when they said the market wasn't ready.
I guess being one of the most profitable game companies IN THE WORLD isn't relevant enough
Saying that it'll do 1 tflop and run 20+x faster than the XBox isn't over hyping? Sorry but I call that hype.
What about all the public aruging MS and Sony have been doing for the past month or two?
I mean shit, it's quite possible the thing could run at that speed and yet still not run games any faster than the XBox because of bottle necks alone. (altho I doubt that would happen, but it's still possible.. numbers alone don't mean shit we need real world performance)
I place my money on the 360 being 2-5x faster than the xbox tops.
Kirby is worlds better. It's much longer and has lots of stuff to unlock.
None of those games run adequately on a 386. 486 maybe, 386 no. My *entire* purpose for upgrading to a 486 was because Doom ran so choppy on my 386. Perhaps it would have done better with a higher clocked 386 with more ram or what not, but I dunno. There is no way Duke 3D runs adequately on a 386.
Sure 320x200 looks like crap to you NOW but 10+ years ago I bet you were perfectly fine with it.
You mean *gasp* the kind of games people who buy the PSP expect to play because that's the entire reason they got the PSP over a GBA/DS in the first place?
It's game sales that should count. Sony can sell all the PSP's they want but until they start selling games they are the ones on the loseing.
In Japan the DS has been the best selling console for several weeks strait and has been easily beating the psp by thousands of units sold every week. The DS has surpassed the PSP in sales for this year and still has over 1 million unit lead over the PSP in Japan alone.
Also the DS has had 2-4 games in the top 10 best selling games in Japan for several months where the PSP has only had 1 single game enter the top 10 and that only lasted a week.
If people aren't buying games for the PSP then it's hardly stealing market share from Nintendo. It's probably stealing more market from portable DVD players than the DS.
10,000 copies? Something tells me you got lied to.
Kirby Canvas Curse is great. Meteos and Electroplankton both look awesome too.
Other games I'm looking forward to...
Nanostray
Viewtiful Joe
Metroid
Castlevania
New Super Mario Bros. (side scroller!)
Hmmm I don't think he was saying Nintendogs wasn't a great game just that it's a game which could appeal to a lot of non-gamers or new gamers.
There are a ton of reasons why MS wants to make games for the DS and there's nothing to say they won't make games for the PSP in the future. Perhaps they are scared of the fact that games haven't been selling so well on the PSP compared to the DS?
You're right.
Wasn't the industry already dying around the time Atari died anyway? I mean, it's not like they died because Nintendo came along and took all their market right? If that is what happened, then Atari dying might not have caused the industry to nearly collapse.
On the second point. I see what you're saying, but maybe Microsoft vs Sony would be a better example.
Nintendo doesn't seem to be competing for the same type of gamers that Sony and MS are competing for.
For instance most of the popular games on Nintendo consoles are made by Nintendo, but say if Microsoft killed off Sony don't you think Rockstar and Squar Enix would start making their popular games for the Xbox?
Nintendo, Microsoft and Sony derive no benefit from the disappearance of any competitor aside from any side-effects ghat MIGHT result in them selling more games and so making more money.
I don't understand what you're saying?
First. Making money IS the benefit. It's their whole purpose for existing in the first place.
Second. Why wouldn't having no competition result in selling more games?
You've got to be fucking kidding me.
As a Texan I'd rather have another civil war to get rid of idiots like you than attack another country to "feel safe"
Seriously. Blow people up, I don't care. Just don't do it outside my FECKING window. I work nights and sleep days. You know how fecking hard it is to sleep with explosions and flying body parts going on right out side my window? Show some curtesy to those of us not being blown up please. Thanks.
Uhh yeah. That's why I pay more that DOUBLE the price for a gallon of gas now than I did just a few years ago. It's all that extra oil we have now from invading iraq. It sure as hell paid off. Talk of the price going up by more than a dollar by the end of the year is further proof of our success in iraq. All this extra oil is REALLY paying off. Soon I'll be paying $4/gallon. Hooray for oil!! Now we just need to invade another country for their oil so I can start paying $8/gallon. Fuck yeah!!! Whose with me?
Seriously, could you be more retarded?